The Sandbagging Scandal of " Pro 40K"

[raceygaming]

I thought this was a pretty interesting article from Auspex tactics. Looks like some of the higher ups in the pro scene started to suggest sandbagging scores to make sure you have an easier time. Kind of Highlights the issue with a W-L-D format where points are not included other than tie breaking.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEMrRuFAixE

I'm glad Nexus uses a pure point system to encourage playing your best and trying to make the best of a loss, if you get one.

[lightcavalier]

There was an interesting discussion reddit involving the TO of the event in question....was a good read.

Rote points certainly works for our little events, but when you are dealing in 60 to 100+ players things get weird (especially as matches between two good players usually have lower close scores, but just adding up wins doesnt work either because you can have multiple undefeated champions)

There are strong arguments being presented that the large events should just randomize pairings within brackets of ppl with the same win records, and then use overall points/points differential/strength of schedule/opponent win rate as the tie breakers at the end of the event.

Thankfully we dont get so big as to have such concerns, nor does the community here seem to be clamoring for that sort of event feel.

edit: there is also some advocacy for sports tournament seeding after round 1 (highest score in bracket plays lowest score in bracket)

[raceygaming]

Do you have the link to the Reddit?

[lightcavalier]

Here is the discussion about the Low Scoring issue with the TO of the event in question
www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/p1ruyd/re_the_low_scoring_controversy_the_tos_perspective/

Here is a spin off discussion about scoring/tiebreakers
www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/p1cl8l/battle_points_tiebreakers_are_bad_and_should_be/

[Jack Shrapnel]

This is one of many reasons why I do not use a W/L/D format in my tournaments with scores as pairing - as this exact issue arises. someone tries to game the system for an easy ride up. Even large events could use points as matchup AND standings (if I can do it with the program available to me at nexus, any of these events with their computerized systems could easily do it as well.)

The arguments I've heard against this system is "top players against one another often do not get big scores" - to that I say "sounds like a close game. Points work then don't they?" Also that someone could technically lose a game and still post up a higher score than someone else who barely won. To that I say "sounds like that player maximized their points and played very tactically, even though they lost. Points work then don't they?"

I know I have faced opposition by NOT going W/L/D for things like club champs - this speaks to one of the reasons why I do not score things that way.

[artonas]

To be honest I prefer W-L-D systems as if i don’t get to finish my games due to slow play and only get 50 points with a win and someone has a loss with 65 points why should they be placed higher on the podium then someone who won their game. I guess I’m the minority on this but I feel like battlepoints are used for determining winners of a game and then if multiple people have wins, it’s to determine who is higher placed. It makes for a quick and easy simple. Winners play winners. I found that in a couple events in 8th I wouldn’t always finish games and with scoring being just battle points, you could finish a game with only a few rounds and due to this not having a chance to get up there.

[question]

I agree with Shannon. His method is cleaner and less open to abuse IMO. As to the slow play point, I find most of my opponents who are slower tend to be new, uncertain of the rules if they are playing a new force, or play infrequently outside of tournaments. I rarely encounter someone I suspect of deliberate slow play in our community. To me this represents a non-issue, particularly averaged over several rounds of play.

[distractedcarnifex]

The sandbagging/submarining that occurred at the Hellstorm GT certainly rubs me the wrong way. Yes we are wargamers, but we shouldn't game the system to try to get easier matchups. 

I like our tourney scoring method. I guess you could still try to "game" it a little in the first round if you are cruising to a victory to try and avoid a top-dog in the second round, but being a short a few VPs could make all the difference at the end (assuming you care of course!)

I think one of the things about our tourneys that keeps them fairly free of such shenanigans is that our events do not go towards ITC rankings. Combined with our prize methodology there is no real incentive for sharks to shark. So to speak. 

[dave]

There's always some sort of scandal, isn't there? I've really never been one to follow the big tournament players anyway, but damn if they don't do their best to keep it that way.

Sportsmanship just seems to have no place in the upper echelons of the ITC/pro player circuit. I do get that WAAC is a way of life, and a good chunk of them signed up for it, and take their own advantages where they can. It's not cheating if enough of us do it?

As a spectator though, their idea of "business as usual" kills any interest in what might have been another engaging facet of the hobby.

[lightcavalier]

Aug 11, 2021 20:41:11 GMT -5 dave said:

There's always some sort of scandal, isn't there? I've really never been one to follow the big tournament players anyway, but damn if they don't do their best to keep it that way.

Sportsmanship just seems to have no place in the upper echelons of the ITC/pro player circuit. I do get that WAAC is a way of life, and a good chunk of them signed up for it, and take their own advantages where they can. It's not cheating if enough of us do it?

As a spectator though, their idea of "business as usual" kills any interest in what might have been another engaging facet of the hobby.

There has been one sportsmanship scandal or another going back to pre-social media days

For anyone who remembers Ard Boyz (the GW sponsored "win a 2500 pt army no holds barred invitational from 4th and 5th edition) the stuff going on now is actually relatively tame.

But I will say that I've been saddened to see these sportsmanship issues go from an ~annual problem to a monthly one....but I guess that just means there are more events for ppl to be doing stuff at.

[lightcavalier]

Aug 11, 2021 20:15:57 GMT -5 distractedcarnifex said:

The sandbagging/submarining that occurred at the Hellstorm GT certainly rubs me the wrong way. Yes we are wargamers, but we shouldn't game the system to try to get easier matchups. 

I like our tourney scoring method. I guess you could still try to "game" it a little in the first round if you are cruising to a victory to try and avoid a top-dog in the second round, but being a short a few VPs could make all the difference at the end (assuming you care of course!)

I think one of the things about our tourneys that keeps them fairly free of such shenanigans is that our events do not go towards ITC rankings. Combined with our prize methodology there is no real incentive for sharks to shark. So to speak. 

Ranking systems bring out the worst in ppl.

This is why flames of war in the UK ditched the invitational masters tournament, because ppl solved the ranking system and started abusing it.....meanwhile FoW rankings in NA are a sham designed to help the same 8 mediocre players (4 of which who run the ranking system) going to masters annually

[Frosty the Pirate]

Gamers are going to game a system. No matter how much you try to make an "unexploitable" system, you will not succeed. That's not a challenge, it's the nature of these types of games. Most of us are nerds to some degree because this is the type of game that appeals to us. When your target audience is nerds, they are going to figure out the most optimal builds, techniques, methods, combos, exploits or efficiencies in any system. That's a reality of life in game-design in general.

As long as prizes, money, titles, or even just enough bragging rights exist in a game, someone-somewhere will break the system for personal benefit/gain. If you aren't ok with that, "competitive 40k" or even just "competitive games" in general maybe aren't for you.

The outcome of this will be the competitive community "will change the system to make it unexploitable in this way ever again!" and we'll all hail the new era until the next scandal emerges.

EDIT: So I don't get any hate-mail, I'm not condoning the actions of the players exploiting the system, simply stating an observation from my years of gaming experience across dozens of game systems and types of games.

[nekekami]

This is why when the community was being rebuilt from the long period of time that we didn't play because of this same, toxic, WAAC leanings of events, Shannon decided to not make rankings 'matter'. That's a big part of the reason that we don't play for prizes, to incentivize the community to consider the community when it comes to events, instead of only yourself. It's also a reason why among other things, Shannon has gotten flak from people who've shown up, stomped the tables and then didn't take home anything but a half-hearted thumbs-up.

A game should be about the game, and the community the community. When you add in a monetary reward, you see the worst of people, and frankly, having been there and seen that fail again and again, I'll take our 'fluffy' friendly sportsmanship and draw prizes over anything resembling that sort of bullshittery.

[kaelon]

Should we have a have a thank you to Shannon day where we bring him beer and cookies for being an amazing T.O.

[Jack Shrapnel]

beer and cookies... now you're talking my language! lol

but seriously, no thank you necessary. I went for many years living in a small town in northwestern Ontario where I would have given just about anything to have a store like Nexus, and a community of gamers to hang out with. Growing the community is my only goal. We just passed 10 years of club championship tournies. I remember several years ago as Justin said above, that we didn't have enough players to have tournies at all, nevermind those with 40+ attendees (covid aside of course). When it was time to rebuild things (well when I took over tournies and built this forum with Tommy) it was the goal to have the community first and foremost. I said I wasn't running tournies for the top 5% of players, I was running them for the OTHER 95%, because without them there were no tournies, there was no community, and there was no fun.

Winning can feel pretty good. But nothing feels quite as good as seeing the newest player at the tourney win the biggest prize, and seeing what a friendly, healthy community of gamers looks like for new people to join, cuz for the longest time I never had that. And it sucked. I've also seen (in the past) new players get stomped by the "top players" and never come back because it wasn't fun. You can still have fun even when you lose (lost today and had a great game!) as long as it's a good game with a fun opponent. We're pushing around toy soldiers for fun after all, how can that be a bad time?

Anyhow... tangent over lol... basically it boils down to this game is supposed to be fun. When people need to be that cutthroat at these big events to win at all costs, all I think is that isn't fun for me. I'll roll dice at nexus instead thanks